Kant believed in something he called the <em>categorical imperative. </em>A categorical imperative is a particular moral position that holds in all possible situations - an unshakable moral law, in other words. For imperatives like "do not kill," this seems reasonable, but for others, such as "do not lie," it gets a little hairier.
Imagine a scenario where a murderer comes to your door and asks if you've see your friend around. Moments before, your friend came to you telling you about the murderer, asking if they could hide at your house. Kant would say you're obligated not to lie, so your options are to either shut the door on the murderer (not a great idea) or give away your friend's hiding place (an even worse idea). You can see how a little white lie wouldn't hurt, and would in fact <em>prevent harm from happening</em>. If you were a sworn Kantian, it might play out badly for everyone involved.
To answer your question in light of that, Kantian ethics hold that certain moral standards are universal and impose a duty on <em>all </em>humans. Do not lie. Period.
Answer:
communication
Explanation:
while using communication you have to use words,symbols and more
Answer: true
Explanation:
The above question has a definite factor that is missing ,which is "Information" to establish the three factors stated above ,information is a key aspect. To determine the reliability of the information , you need to know the source of the information ,"who wrote it"?, is the question.
Another question you ask is ,"where is it coming from" I.e which site is it ,is from a reliable site. And lastly,
"When was this made public"?, I.e how current is the information. All these are factors that determine the reliability of a source in terms of information to the public
D, it says it will be appointed by the governor
